Ecosystem services provided by waterbirds

Ecosystem services are ecosystem processes that directly or indirectly benefit human well‐being. There has been much recent literature identifying different services and the communities and species that provide them. This is a vital first step towards management and maintenance of these services. In this review, we specifically address the waterbirds, which play key functional roles in many aquatic ecosystems, including as predators, herbivores and vectors of seeds, invertebrates and nutrients, although these roles have often been overlooked. Waterbirds can maintain the diversity of other organisms, control pests, be effective bioindicators of ecological conditions, and act as sentinels of potential disease outbreaks. They also provide important provisioning (meat, feathers, eggs, etc.) and cultural services to both indigenous and westernized societies. We identify key gaps in the understanding of ecosystem services provided by waterbirds and areas for future research required to clarify their functional role in ecosystems and the services they provide. We consider how the economic value of these services could be calculated, giving some examples. Such valuation will provide powerful arguments for waterbird conservation.     

Ecosystem services provided by bromeliad plants: A systematic review

The unprecedented loss of biological diversity has negative impacts on ecosystems and the associated benefits which they provide to humans. Bromeliads have high diversity throughout the Neotropics, but they have been negatively affected by habitat loss and fragmentation, climate change, invasive species, and commercialization for ornamental purpose. These plants provide direct benefits to the human society, and they also form microecosystems in which accumulated water and nutrients support the communities of aquatic and terrestrial species, thus maintaining local diversity. We performed a systematic review of the contribution of bromeliads to ecosystem services across their native geographical distribution. We showed that bromeliads provide a range of ecosystem services such as maintenance of biodiversity, community structure, nutrient cycling, and the provisioning of food and water. Moreover, bromeliads can regulate the spread of diseases, and water and carbon cycling, and they have the potential to become important sources of chemical and pharmaceutical products. The majority of this research was performed in Brazil, but future research from other Neotropical countries with a high diversity of bromeliads would fill the current knowledge gaps and increase the generality of these findings. This systematic review identified that future research should focus on provisioning, regulating, and cultural services that have been currently overlooked. This would enhance our understanding of how bromeliad diversity contributes to human welfare, and the negative consequences that loss of bromeliad plants can have on communities of other species and the healthy functioning of the entire ecosystems.     

Compliance to Brazil's Forest Code will not protect biodiversity and ecosystem services

In striking contrast to heartening events in the adjacent Amazon, Brazil's Cerrado biome has seen continued deforestation over the past decade. Though approved in 2012, no study evaluated the impacts of new Brazilian Forest Code (FC) revision on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Here, we report the first assessment of the likely loss and gain in biodiversity and ecosystem services expected if the FC is properly enforced across 200 million hectares of the Cerrado. We also discuss the challenges associated to compliance with the law and present opportunities for conservation. Establishing restoration programmes in private properties with currently less native vegetation than required by the FC could create habitat for 25% more threatened species than now found in these places and could also increase water security and carbon stock in 56.6 MtC. More important, trading environmental reserve quotas coupled with the strategic expansion of protected areas on private and public land could definitely rescue the Cerrado from the brink.     

生态系统服务网及其生态学意义

生态系统服务概念的提出将人类福祉与生态环境更直接地联系起来,有助于认识和解决发展与保护的难题。从生态系统服务网络的视角出发,可以更好的理解生态系统服务供给、流动和需求等相关复杂问题。（1）生态系统服务网将不同生态过程与服务有机联系起来,为生态系统服务交互研究提供参考。（2）不同尺度下生态系统服务间的交互作用以及自然-社会的互动是网络体系的重要组成部分,按服务网络间联系方式可以划分为网状层次、关系模块和对象模块。（3）生态系统服务在生物、生境网络中形成,受自然因素和人为因素的双重影响,服务网络间的联系与转化受生态系统服务流和网络关系的制约。（4）景观异质性、生物多样性和生态循环分别是生态系统服务网络形成的基础、核心和形成机制。（5）生态系统服务网络便于生态系统服务价值评估、空间制图,是提高人类对环境认知的重要手段。（6）人类福祉与生态系统服务间的非线性关系适宜用网络来表达,景观优化实质上是生态系统服务网调控的动态过程。     

Review: An integrated graphical tool for analysing impacts and services provided by livestock farming

Livestock farming is criticized for negatively impacting the environment, concerns about animal welfare and the impact of excessive meat consumption on human health. However, livestock farming provides other underappreciated and poorly communicated benefits to society in terms of employment, product quality, cultural landscapes and carbon storage by grasslands. Few attempts have been made so far to simultaneously consider the services and impacts provided by livestock production. Here, we propose an integrated graphical tool, called the ‘barn’ to explicitly summarize the synergies and trade-offs between services and impacts provided by livestock farming. It illustrates livestock farming interacting with its physical, economic and social environment along five interfaces: (i) Markets, (ii) Work and employment, (iii) Inputs, (iv) Environment and climate, (v) Social and cultural factors. This graphical tool was then applied by comparing two contrasting livestock production areas (high livestock density v. grassland-based), and the dominant v. a niche system within a crop-livestock area. We showed the barn could be used for cross-comparisons of services and impacts across livestock production areas, and for multi-level analysis of services and impacts of livestock farming within a given area. The barn graphically summarizes the ecological and socio-economic aspects of livestock farming by explicitly representing multiple services and impacts of different systems in a simple yet informative way. Information for the five interfaces relies on available quantitative assessments from the literature or data sets, and on expert-knowledge for more qualitative factors, such as social and cultural ones. The ‘barn’ can also inform local stakeholders or policy-makers about potential opportunities and threats to the future of livestock farming in specific production areas. It has already been used as a pedagogical tool for teaching the diversity of services and impacts of livestock systems across Europe and is currently developed as a serious game for encouraging knowledge exchange and sharing different viewpoints between stakeholders.     

Review: Associations among goods,impacts and ecosystem services provided by livestock farming

Livestock is a major driver in most rural landscapes and economics, but it also polarises debate over its environmental impacts, animal welfare and human health. Conversely, the various services that livestock farming systems provide to society are often overlooked and have rarely been quantified. The aim of analysing bundles of services is to chart the coexistence and interactions between the various services and impacts provided by livestock farming, and to identify sets of ecosystem services (ES) that appear together repeatedly across sites and through time. We review three types of approaches that analyse associations among impacts and services from local to global scales: (i) detecting ES associations at system or landscape scale, (ii) identifying and mapping bundles of ES and impacts and (iii) exploring potential drivers using prospective scenarios. At a local scale, farming practices interact with landscape heterogeneity in a multi-scale process to shape grassland biodiversity and ES. Production and various ES provided by grasslands to farmers, such as soil fertility, biological regulations and erosion control, benefit to some extent from the functional diversity of grassland species, and length of pasture phase in the crop rotation. Mapping ES from the landscape up to the EU-wide scale reveals a frequent trade-off between livestock production on one side and regulating and cultural services on the other. Maps allow the identification of target areas with higher ecological value or greater sensitivity to risks. Using two key factors (livestock density and the proportion of permanent grassland within utilised agricultural area), we identified six types of European livestock production areas characterised by contrasted bundles of services and impacts. Livestock management also appeared to be a key driver of bundles of services in prospective scenarios. These scenarios simulate a breakaway from current production, legislation (e.g. the use of food waste to fatten pigs) and consumption trends (e.g. halving animal protein consumption across Europe). Overall, strategies that combine a reduction of inputs, of the use of crops from arable land to feed livestock, of food waste and of meat consumption deliver a more sustainable food future. Livestock as part of this sustainable future requires further enhancement, quantification and communication of the services provided by livestock farming to society, which calls for the following: (i) a better targeting of public support, (ii) more precise quantification of bundles of services and (iii) better information to consumers and assessment of their willingness to pay for these services.     

Ecosystem services provided by semi-natural and intensified grasslands: Synergies,trade-offs and linkages to plant traits and functional richness

Question

Semi-natural grasslands (SNG) are important for maintaining biodiversity and ecological processes in farmland. Current pasture-based livestock production mainly occurs on intensified grasslands (IG) that have been agronomically improved. Although it is documented that SNG and IG differ in terms of plant diversity, their ability to provide ecosystem services (ES) in farmland is less explored. Here, we review the role of SNG and IG in delivering ES, illustrate their trade-offs and synergies, and examine how ES can be assessed by using plant traits and functional richness.

Results

We found that SNG generate a wider range of ES than IG. Trade-offs exist between ES that appear more pronounced in IG between high biomass production and other ES. SNG are good in providing habitat for biodiversity, supporting pollination and cultural services. SNG also have a significantly wider range of plant functional traits and a higher functional richness, suggesting that the potential to supply ES in SNG is partly driven by higher number of species and their functional diversity.

Conclusion

Clearer trade-offs were found in IG compared with SNG, supported both by the literature and the functional richness. This suggests that functional knowledge could be a good complement to understand the mechanisms behind ES generation and could help with tailoring grassland management to sustain biodiversity, ecological functions and ES. Although both IG and SNG are likely needed for the long-term sustainability of food production, both could aim for a more balanced generation of ES, increasing biodiversity and functional redundancy at the landscape scale.     

青海湖湿地生态系统服务价值评估

青海湖是我国最大的内陆高原咸水湖,为社会提供了多项生态系统服务．开展青海湖湿地生态系统服务价值评估能用直观的经济数据揭示青海湖湿地生态系统对受益者的直接贡献,使青海湖湿地生态保护被纳入经济效益权衡的决策分析中.本文根据青海湖湿地生态系统特征及其所在区域社会经济特征,确定了青海湖湿地生态系统最终服务价值评估指标体系,并以2012年为基础年,综合运用市场价值法、替代成本法、区域旅行费用模型、条件价值法等方法定量评估了青海湖湿地生态系统提供给受益者的生态经济价值.结果表明： 2012年青海湖湿地生态系统最终服务总价值为6749.08亿元,其中,水源涵养和气候调节价值分别为4797.57亿元和1929.34亿元,分别占总价值的71.1% 和 28.6%.对所评估的8项最终服务按其价值大小排序为:水源涵养>气候调节>休闲娱乐>非使用价值>释氧>原材料生产>固碳>食物生产.评估结果用直观的数字揭示了青海湖湿地生态系统对受益者的巨大贡献,不仅能提高管理者和公众的湿地保护认知,也为生态补偿标准制定提供了数据基础.评估指标体系为区分湿地生态系统中间服务（功能）和最终服务、开展湿地生态系统最终服务动态评估和优化管理提供了重要方向.     

Climate change, biotic interactions and ecosystem services

Climate change is real. The wrangling debates are over, and we now need to move onto a predictive ecology that will allow managers of landscapes and policy makers to adapt to the likely changes in biodiversity over the coming decades. There is ample evidence that ecological responses are already occurring at the individual species (population) level. The challenge is how to synthesize the growing list of such observations with a coherent body of theory that will enable us to predict where and when changes will occur, what the consequences might be for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and what we might do practically in order to maintain those systems in as good condition as possible. It is thus necessary to investigate the effects of climate change at the ecosystem level and to consider novel emergent ecosystems composed of new species assemblages arising from differential rates of range shifts of species. Here, we present current knowledge on the effects of climate change on biotic interactions and ecosystem services supply, and summarize the papers included in this volume. We discuss how resilient ecosystems are in the face of the multiple components that characterize climate change, and suggest which current ecological theories may be used as a starting point to predict ecosystem-level effects of climate change.     

Ecosystem services provided by dung beetles in Australia

Although there are nearly 500 species of native dung beetles in Australia, most are adapted to small, hard, dry, pelletised marsupial droppings and not to dealing with the large, moist deposits of cattle. In 1788, Governor Arthur Phillip arrived at Botany Bay with five cows, two bulls, 44 sheep and seven horses: this signalled major changes in Australia. Now there are about 27 million cattle, whose annual dung production has a dry matter content of about 42 million tonnes. Until CSIRO introduced exotic dung beetles in the 1960s, the dung of these herbivores sat on the soil surface, sometimes for years, locking up organic matter, smothering pasture and polluting waterways. CSIRO introduced 53 exotic dung beetle species, of which 43 were released to the Australian mainland between 1965 and 1985. Twenty-three of these have become established, many of which have reached the natural limits of their distribution. I consider the reason for the failure of the other 30 species to establish and briefly review previous contributions to examining the role of dung beetles in delivering ecosystem services, noting that much of the published literature concerns laboratory studies. New field data are then examined on the way in which introduced species are transforming dung communities and the ecosystem services they provide. The capacity of deep-tunnelling dung beetles to transform the soil profile is examined along with their effects on pasture production and the flow of nutrients from dung on pasture. The biocontrol capacity of dung beetle activity is considered in relation to the native bush fly, Musca vetustissima, the introduced buffalo fly, Haematobia irritans exigua, and dung-borne intestinal parasites (helminths and Cryptosporidium). The rationale for introducing additional species to Australia is considered.     

陆地生态系统服务与生物多样性研究进展

在生物多样性迅速消失的压力下,人类面临生态系统服务质量严重下降的威胁。为了使生态系统的重要功能更直观的展现在人们面前,许多学者把生态系统服务对人类的惠益进行整理分类,最有影响力的是千年生态系统评估(MA,Millennium Ecosystem Assessment)把生态系统服务分为供给、调节、文化和支持服务四类,服务的核心是生态系统的产品、过程和格局。生态系统服务的识别与分类是生态系统功能的对象化过程,也是以人类需求来审视生态系统的过程。生态系统通过结构-过程-功能这一途径来实现生态系统服务,各种服务的直接动力来源于自然界生物地球化学循环,生物多样性通过生态系统属性和过程来影响生态系统服务形成和维持。生物多样性越高,生态系统功能性状的范围越广,生态系统服务质量就越高、越稳定。全球变化中的土地利用和土地覆盖变化是生物多样性快速下降的主要原因,也是目前影响生态系统服务最广泛、最剧烈的驱动力,而这正是人类活动造成的,人类需求和生态系统有限的服务能力之间在不同尺度表现出严重冲突。要提高生态系统服务质量,要在不同区域进行重点不同的布局,尽可能的扩大生态系统规模和提高生态系统功能,核心是提高生物多样性水平。     

Ecosystem service benefits of contrasting conservation strategies in a human-dominated region

The hope among policy-makers and scientists alike is that conservation strategies designed to protect biodiversity also provide direct benefits to people by protecting other vital ecosystem services. The few studies that have examined the delivery of ecosystem services by existing conservation efforts have concentrated on large, ‘wilderness’-style biodiversity reserves. However, such reserves are not realistic options for densely populated regions. Here, we provide the first analyses that compare representation of biodiversity and three other ecosystem services across several contrasting conservation strategies in a human-dominated landscape (England). We show that small protected areas and protected landscapes (restrictive zoning) deliver high carbon storage and biodiversity, while existing incentive payment (agri-environment) schemes target areas that offer little advantage over other parts of England in terms of biodiversity, carbon storage and agricultural production. A fourth ecosystem service—recreation—is under-represented by all three strategies. Our findings are encouraging as they illustrate that restrictive zoning can play a major role in protecting natural capital assets in densely populated regions. However, trade-offs exist even among the four ecosystem services we considered, suggesting that a portfolio of conservation and sustainability investments will be needed to deliver both biodiversity and the other ecosystem services demanded by society.     

集成生态系统服务与生物多样性的系统保护规划

生物多样性和生态系统服务的保护与可持续管理是当今世界面临的重大挑战之一,但如何判识与优化集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护对象的保护优先区网络,相关研究还很有限。针对“三江并流”区,选取珍稀濒危与特有动植物物种和自然植被类型作为生物多样性保护对象,以调节服务(碳存储、固碳和土壤保持)、文化服务(自然游憩)和供给服务(水源供给)为生态系统服务保护对象。应用系统保护规划方法,首先判识出单一生物多样性和生态系统服务保护优先区;然后,分析这些保护优先区间的相关关系,并选择与生物多样性正相关的生态系统服务类型,判识集成生态系统服务与生物多样性的保护优先区;最后,评估了集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护优先区在六类已建保护地中的保护状况。结果表明：(1)“三江并流”区多情景规划得到的生物多样性与生态系统服务保护优先区之间均呈正相关关系;(2)与分别针对生态系统服务和生物多样性的规划情景相比,集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护优先区能够同时对两类保护对象提供最高的保护覆盖率;(3)集成生态系统服务和生物多样性保护优先区占研究区总面积的48.9%,其已建保护地覆盖率为32.5%,说明现有保护地体系仍存在保护...     

不同生态恢复方式下生态系统服务与生物多样性恢复效果的整合分析

全球范围内关键生态系统服务的减少使人类社会面临巨大的威胁,生物多样性是生态系统提供各种产品和服务的基础。生态恢复工程对退化的生态系统服务和生物多样性进行修复,对于缓解人类环境压力具有非常重要的意义。长期的理论和实践工作形成了多种生态恢复措施:(1)单纯基于生态系统自我设计的自然恢复方式,(2)人为设计对环境条件进行干预,反馈影响生态系统的自我设计,(3)人为设计对目标种群和生态系统进行直接干预和重建。这3类恢复方式可以在不同程度上定向的影响生态系统的恢复进程,反映了人类对生态系统的低度、中度和高度介入。哪种恢复方式和介入程度能够实现更好的恢复效果,是生态恢复学中的一个关键问题,但到目前为止,虽广有争议,却无定量的分析和结论。针对这个空白,通过对ISI Web of Knowledge数据库中生态恢复相关文献的整合分析,基于数学统计的方法定量比较在不同条件下低度介入(自然恢复)、中度介入(环境干预)和高度介入(直接干预)3种恢复方式对生态系统服务与生物多样性的恢复效果。论文从4个方面展开研究:(1)低度、中度、高度介入生态恢复方式的划分,(2)比较3大类介入方式对生态系统服务和生物多样性恢复效果的差异,(3)不同气候条件、生态系统类型和恢复时间等背景因素的影响,(4)生物多样性恢复和生态系统服务恢复之间的关系。研究结果揭示了不同生态恢复方式的适用条件,以及对生物多样性和生态系统恢复相互关系的作用,对生态恢复实践中恢复方式的选择有指导作用。对未来的研究也有启示意义,如针对特定生态系统服务或具体研究问题进一步探索低度、中度和高度介入生态恢复方式的作用规律和机制;将地区的社会经济水平、生态系统的受损程度等因素纳入生态恢复方式的考察,以最优化生态恢复成本-效率等。     

Species trait diversity sustains multiple dietary nutrients supplied by freshwater fisheries

Species, through their traits, influence how ecosystems simultaneously sustain multiple functions. However, it is unclear how trait diversity sustains the multiple contributions biodiversity makes to people. Freshwater fisheries nourish hundreds of millions of people globally, but overharvesting and river fragmentation are increasingly affecting catches. We analyse how loss of nutritional trait diversity in consumed fish portfolios affects the simultaneous provisioning of six essential dietary nutrients using household data from the Amazon and Tonlé Sap, two of Earth's most productive and diverse freshwater fisheries. We find that fish portfolios with high trait diversity meet higher thresholds of required daily intakes for a greater variety of nutrients with less fish biomass. This beneficial biodiversity effect is driven by low redundancy in species nutrient content profiles. Our findings imply that sustaining the dietary contributions fish make to people given declining biodiversity could require more biomass and ultimately exacerbate fishing pressure in already-stressed ecosystems.     

Biodiversity in the context of ecosystem services: the applied need for systems approaches

Recent evidence strongly suggests that biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation continue. How might a systems approach to ecology help us better understand and address these issues? Systems approaches play a very limited role in the science that underpins traditional biodiversity conservation, but could provide important insights into mechanisms that affect population growth. This potential is illustrated using data from a critically endangered bird population. Although species-specific insights have practical value, the main applied challenge for a systems approach is to help improve our understanding of the role of biodiversity in the context of ecosystem services (ES) and the associated values and benefits people derive from these services. This has profound implications for the way we conceptualize and address ecological problems. Instead of focusing directly on biodiversity, the important response variables become measures of values and benefits, ES or ecosystem processes. We then need to understand the sensitivity of these variables to biodiversity change relative to other abiotic or anthropogenic factors, which includes exploring the role of variability at different levels of biological organization. These issues are discussed using the recent UK National Ecosystems Assessment as a framework.     

基于生物多样性和生态系统服务的青藏高原保护优先区和保护空缺识别

协同生物多样性保护和生态系统服务功能维持对制定系统性保护规划具有重要意义。研究以青藏高原为研究区,应用Maxent模型模拟了重点植物的空间分布,结合世界保护联盟(IUCN)重点动物空间分布数据和生态系统服务空间分布,利用Zonation模型依次识别了基于单一因素的保护优先区以及集成生物多样性和生态系统服务的保护优先区,评估了青藏高原现有自然保护地对保护优先区、重要物种及生态系统服务的保护状况和保护空缺。结果表明:(1)青藏高原保护优先区保护价值呈现由东南向西北递减趋势,优先区主要分布在青藏高原东南缘喜马拉雅山地、雅鲁藏布江中游河谷及横断山区等区域,生物多样性保护优先区和生态系统服务保护优先区分布略有差异,存在43.2%的空间重叠;(2)在重要物种保护上,自然保护地对两栖动物的保护率最高,平均保护了38.2%,哺乳动物次之(24%),爬行动物的保护率较低,仅为10.2%。对生态系统服务功能覆盖率分别是44.1%(防风固沙)、27.1%(水源涵养)、22.3%(土壤保持)、17.1%(碳固定)和16.6%(洪水调蓄);(3)自然保护地对研究识别的保护优先区存在保护空缺,仅覆盖了26.8%的集成保护优先区,Ⅰ级、Ⅱ级和Ⅲ级优先区保护空缺面积占青藏高原面积的7.2%、6.9%和7.7%。研究结果可为青藏高原以国家公园为主体的自然保护地体系优化提供科学依据与理论支撑。     

生态系统服务形成机制研究进展

近年来,生态系统服务的形成及其机制已成为生态学的研究热点之一.在2005年举行的千年生态系统评估之后,生态系统服务的衍生研究,如生态系统服务分类、评估、权衡与协同、传递和生态系统服务流等也迅速增加,使生态系统服务的研究步入崭新阶段.为更好地了解生态系统服务并加深对其的研究,及时梳理生态系统服务的形成机制很有必要,然而目前对这方面的研究仍未形成一个恰当的研究范式.本文在查阅大量中、英文文献的基础上,主要总结了近10余年与生态系统服务形成机制相关的研究;并从“内因”和“外因”两个方面出发,重点对生物多样性及人类参与活动在生态系统服务形成过程中所起到的作用进行分析和梳理,并提出了研究展望.     

Invertebrates,ecosystem services and climate change

The sustainability of ecosystem services depends on a firm understanding of both how organisms provide these services to humans and how these organisms will be altered with a changing climate. Unquestionably a dominant feature of most ecosystems, invertebrates affect many ecosystem services and are also highly responsive to climate change. However, there is still a basic lack of understanding of the direct and indirect paths by which invertebrates influence ecosystem services, as well as how climate change will affect those ecosystem services by altering invertebrate populations. This indicates a lack of communication and collaboration among scientists researching ecosystem services and climate change effects on invertebrates, and land managers and researchers from other disciplines, which becomes obvious when systematically reviewing the literature relevant to invertebrates, ecosystem services, and climate change. To address this issue, we review how invertebrates respond to climate change. We then review how invertebrates both positively and negatively influence ecosystem services. Lastly, we provide some critical future directions for research needs, and suggest ways in which managers, scientists and other researchers may collaborate to tackle the complex issue of sustaining invertebrate‐mediated services under a changing climate.